Wash trades would be of equal size and similar price, there hasnt been the presence of such trades here. They are also done through accounts from differing brokers thus they wouldnt be INTERNALIZED and that would result in being marked short. Shall we go over the simple rule called SEC Rule 200? Ehh why not:

Quote:

---

Rule 200 – Definitions and Marking Requirements. Rule 200 incorporates and amends Rules 3b-3, 10a-1(d) and 10a-1(e)(13). It defines ownership for short sale purposes, and clarifies the requirement to determine a short seller’s net aggregate position. It also incorporates requirements to mark sales in all equity securities “long,” “short,” or “short exempt.”

Rule 200(g) of Regulation SHO requires a broker-dealer to mark sell orders in any equity security as "long" or "short." Rule 200(a) defines a short sale as "any sale of a security which the seller does not own or any sale which is consummated by the delivery of a security borrowed by, or for the account of, the seller." Rule 200(g)(1) provides that "[a]n order to sell shall be marked "long" only if the seller is deemed to own the security being sold pursuant to paragraphs (a) through (f) of this section and either: (i) The security to be delivered is in the physical possession or control of the broker or dealer; or (ii) It is reasonably expected that the security will be in the physical possession or control of the broker or dealer no later than the settlement of the transaction." Rule 200(c) of Regulation SHO provides that a person shall be deemed to own securities only to the extent that he has a net long position in such securities. In addition, to determine its own net position, Rule 200(f) requires a broker-dealer to aggregate all of its positions in a security unless it qualifies for independent trading unit aggregation.

---